log_jammin:everything else aside, especially since I'm not going to bother reading that article, is submitter/daily fail implying that he shouldn't get state benefits because two of his kids are criminals?

so if i robbed a gas station they should take away my parents social security?

Of course not, they're implying that NO ONE should get state benefits because some of the people who do are shady.

This is just the Daily Fail jumping on the bandwagon. One of our TV channels is showing a controversial series called Benefits Street which is essentially poverty porn aimed at the Fail's right-wing readership.But the truth is that benefit fraud accounts for a tiny percentage of the total social security bill, and represents less than one percent of what the government could recoup if it clamped down on tax avoidance and evasion. It costs the country more every time the RAF flies one of its planes into a mountain, and if the pilot projects successfully that event will get no more than two paragraphs on an inside page.MPs themselves have been shown to be the worst offenders when it comes to illegally claiming government handouts.

Soooo 1.2mil over the course of what? 40 years and feeding/clothing 15 children (7 don't know him)? I'm sure that number includes whatever bloated housing subsidy he got for his flat as well.

*math noises*

Okay that's about 67,000 (pounds... not opening charmap) a year which even including housing bennies is pretty extravagant to do nothing and it says he's actually only been out of work for 10 years so even if he was an on again/off again worker before then that number gets inflated to let's say 80,000.

Now I know we are supposed to buy into the whole idea that England is a nation of loafers who live like gods on the back of the poor starving worker class and persecuted upper crust but somehow... SOMEHOW I don't think they pay welfare bums what equates to WELL over $100,000 per year.

That said... for those who allow these types of story whip them up into a right wing frenzy (and believe me I dislike people who actually abuse the system just as much as the herpiest tea derper) then your ire should be directed at the incompetent social workers who allow this type of crap to go on for generations.

So no... you don't get to take examples like this (well real examples of abuse anyway) and attack all poor people who require assistance but DO get to attack another favorite target. The Big Gov Bureaucrat all sitting smug and elitist in their ivory tower handin' out yer hard earned jerb monies to the druggies and blacks.

Being arrested for drunk and disorderly doesn't mean you were just drunk in public, it usually gets pulled out when someone drunk is harassing someone (or doing something exceptionally stupid, like walking down the middle of a busy road while drunk) but not enough so they can easily be prosecuted for a more serious offense.

It wouldn't normally be considered a big issue or making someone a "criminal" by most people, and it is unlikely it would affect the person much (most employers if informed of it probably wouldn't take any significant notice of it when hiring for example), I guess it would be about in line with being caught speeding - if it happened once, no big deal, if it happens regularly that would be concerning.

marcpen:This is just the Daily Fail jumping on the bandwagon. One of our TV channels is showing a controversial series called Benefits Street which is essentially poverty porn aimed at the Fail's right-wing readership.But the truth is that benefit fraud accounts for a tiny percentage of the total social security bill, and represents less than one percent of what the government could recoup if it clamped down on tax avoidance and evasion. It costs the country more every time the RAF flies one of its planes into a mountain, and if the pilot projects successfully that event will get no more than two paragraphs on an inside page.MPs themselves have been shown to be the worst offenders when it comes to illegally claiming government handouts.

there's been a ton of complaints about that show. i think it's gonig to get axed

the fail is the last place id look for any assessment of the welfare state

Turning obese takes hard work. A person of average will-power could never pull off maiming him/herself like this: You have to shut off your self-respect and turn into a lazy, inactive gluttoon filled to the brim with fats, sugar and self-entitlement instead of living a healthy life and enjoying physical activities. Therefore a dedicated fatso has earned all the respect that society has in store for such a special lifestyle.

Monophtalmos:Turning obese takes hard work. A person of average will-power could never pull off maiming him/herself like this: You have to shut off your self-respect and turn into a lazy, inactive gluttoon filled to the brim with fats, sugar and self-entitlement instead of living a healthy life and enjoying physical activities. Therefore a dedicated fatso has earned all the respect that society has in store for such a special lifestyle.

Not that I am, in any way, defending abusers of the welfare system in any country, but... The headline, here and at The Fail, say this guy is a drug dealer. However, the only mention of drugs in the article is that the guy was found guilty of "possession of cannabis" which the paper SAYS was a large amount, but there's nothing in there about any sort of official drug dealing charge. It seems to me that this guy's biggest problem is an inability to keep it in his pants. Bailiff! Whack his peepee!